8 ms·

Administration seeking $1B settlement from UCLA

46 points by SubiculumCode 1y ago

strangeloops85 1y ago
Really outrageous extortion. UCLA and UC as a whole are running budget deficits and facing reduced state support (as well as the grant cancelations). There's simply no money for this and the white house knows it.
- dmitrygr 1y ago
  > There's simply no money for this Being broke has never been an excuse to not pay fines. (I make no judgement on the actual claims, the courts exist for that)
  - SubiculumCode 1y ago
    There is no legal basis for the fine.
    - dmitrygr 1y ago
      That is an entirely different argument, not the one I was responding to
    - polski-g 1y ago
      When you are ignorant about the world, it becomes a very confusing place. https://x.com/JohnDSailer/status/1907794415436873742?t=Zw9FFVC-NbpuDBmH58BIew&s=19 https://x.com/JohnDSailer/status/1907794415436873742?t=Zw9FF... There are dozens of examples of UCLA violating federal civil rights laws. You just decided to pretend they don't exist.
      - SubiculumCode 1y ago
        That is not relevant to what I am saying at all. I am saying that there is no legal basis for demanding 1 Billion dollars in as that is 1) a made up number from Trump's head, 2) UCLA is innocent until proven guilty, 3) withholding Federal grants duly awarded violates impoundment.
        polski-g 1y ago
        That's why it's a settlement offer, not a judgement. If they think they're innocent, they can go through discovery and go to trial. But for the same reason Columbia settled: they know they broke the law. They used protected characteristics in hiring decisions.
        SubiculumCode 1y ago
        And the suspension of grants? And is settlement offers even legal in this context?
        polski-g 1y ago
        The suspension of grants is not the DOJ. It is the DOE for violations of Title 9.
        SubiculumCode 1y ago
        Then why is the resumption of those grants tied to it?
        SubiculumCode 1y ago
        How is the suspension of a research grant even related to a violation of title 9? It's bullshit, and everyone knows it, because it is actually extortionistic bullshit.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
SubiculumCode 1y ago
If they decide to settle, even if for a much smaller amount, its a big L for the UC system and the nation. The past Universities were much smaller, but the UC system is a beast. They must fight this or we are really going down the road of a politicized and neutered academia (like in Russia). This along with the recent Executive Order claiming to be able to require a political appointee to approve every research grant, we are going down the wrong road. I am constantly thinking about this modern misunderstanding of what the framers of the Constitution meant by "Executive Power" is simple "to execute the law". "Article II Vests Executive Power, Not the Royal Prerogative" [1][2] is critical and needs to be set front stage. [1] https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2062/ https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2062/ [2]https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-meaning-of-article-ii-and-%27executive-power%27-to-trump https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-meaning-of-article-...
- homeonthemtn 1y ago
  Blame Congress. There are 3 branches of power meant to keep the others in check. That's not happened in...20, 30 years now?
  - jonnycomputer 1y ago
    Why not both?
  - SubiculumCode 1y ago
    Yes. But there are systemic reasons that this has become the case. 1. For the house, since 1932 or so, the number of House Representatives has been fixed, meaning what used to be 30-50k citizens per representative, is quickly approaching 1M citizens:1 ratio. Instead of knocking on your neighbor's doors, you need to beg for money to run an expensive campaign. 2. Starting with Radio and TV and into hyperdrive with the internet, national political figures like the President can command a huge amount of political donations to be under their own control. That money can and is used to threaten House Representatives with getting primaried by the President, see 1. above. 3. As the law article I posted in the parent comment above thoroughly and convincingly investigated, the meaning of Executive Powers has changed from "Congress tells me what to do, and I do it" to I am a mini-king. Presidents have been able to push this growth as well, because see 2, then see 1.
dfee 1y ago
Beyond the headline - the context seems to be this: > A draft of a proposed agreement sent to the school Friday and obtained by CNN requires UCLA to pay the federal government $1 billion over multiple installments, along with a $172 million claims fund for people impacted by violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. > The agreement the administration is proposing – which, if agreed to, would mark the biggest settlement it’s received from a higher education institution — requires a resolution monitor to oversee the school, as well as a new senior administrator who will be focused on compliance with anti-discrimination laws. > The proposed agreement prohibits overnight demonstrations and calls on the school to revise its policies and procedures on protests. It also requires UCLA to discontinue race and ethnicity-based scholarships and provide the resolution monitor with admissions data. > The proposal would ensure single-sex housing for women on campus and ensure athletic recognition for female athletes in women’s sports. The UCLA hospital and medical school will also be expected to stop providing gender-affirming care. > In return, UCLA’s funding would be restored and the school would be eligible for future federal grants and contracts.
- jonnycomputer 1y ago
  And to stop providing gender affirming care.
  - SubiculumCode 1y ago
    Not to mention that the lawsuit in question has already been settled [1] https://jewishjournal.com/news/383073/settlement-reached-in-uc-antisemitism-case/ https://jewishjournal.com/news/383073/settlement-reached-in-...
jonnycomputer 1y ago
>The UCLA hospital and medical school will also be expected to stop providing gender-affirming care. What does this have to do with anything that UCLA is accused of? This isn't about discrimination. This is about Trump forcing America's institutions to bend to his will. It's about power, and nothing else.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- spondylosaurus 1y ago
  It's "discrimination" when it helps people the admin doesn't like, but it's mandatory to actually discriminate against people the admin doesn't like.
  - sundaeofshock 1y ago
    I wish people would stop using the term admin in relationship to Trump. This is the Trump Regime and we should all act accordingly.
    - jonnycomputer 1y ago
      the problem is is that doing so makes you automatically lose credibility with a large part of the public. another problem is that Trump is not (yet) a dictator and we are (still, for now) a Constitutional democracy.
      - jfengel 1y ago
        If you are criticizing Trump, did you have any credibility with that part of the public to begin with? Not saying there aren't reasons to avoid name calling. But I feel like battle lines are fixed by now. I don't feel like "Good point" is a likely reaction to anything said by anyone.
        jonnycomputer 1y ago
shortrounddev2 1y ago
Any university that settles with that fascist are cowards at best, and committing bribery at worst
mikeyouse 1y ago
I really wish some of the cowards braying about censorship on campus over the past decade would actually stand up against this… the entire right-wing media and legal apparatus (aside from FIRE maybe?) is just standing by or cheering this lawlessness and it’s infuriating.
- phonon 1y ago
  FIRE has been pretty clear... e.g. https://www.thefire.org/news/inside-trump-administrations-extortion-industrial-complex https://www.thefire.org/news/inside-trump-administrations-ex...
  - UncleMeat 1y ago
    FIRE talks out of both sides of their mouth. Yes, they aren't absolute partisans and have been materially opposing part of Trump's fascist regime. But their media arm remains excessively focused on perceived excesses of the left and they've been unable to make a consistent full throated public denouncement of what is happening.
- dissent 1y ago
  I've never set foot in the USA, but from an outsider looking in, it seems like academic integrity was sidelined by ideology during that period. Once this has been normalised, it's not difficult for a competing ideology to move in. Seems like a real shame, but surely this didn't just happen overnight in 2024.
- tastyface 1y ago
  Attempting to shame hypocrites is a pointless endeavor. They will only laugh at you while continuing to do what they do. The only reasonable move is to interpret them as damage and route around them.
  - mikeyouse 1y ago
    I don’t disagree but as far as I’m aware, they’re necessary for this whole democracy mess to work. The only reason Nixon was forced out of office is because his party finally had enough and couldn’t stand the shame (and certain electoral defeat) had he remained in office, so they loudly abandoned him and indicated they’d vote for his removal from office if they were given the choice.

46 points by SubiculumCode 1y ago

Really outrageous extortion. UCLA and UC as a whole are running budget deficits and facing reduced state support (as well as the grant cancelations). There's simply no money for this and the white house knows it.

dmitrygr 1y ago
> There's simply no money for this Being broke has never been an excuse to not pay fines. (I make no judgement on the actual claims, the courts exist for that)
- SubiculumCode 1y ago
  There is no legal basis for the fine.
  - dmitrygr 1y ago
    That is an entirely different argument, not the one I was responding to
  - polski-g 1y ago
    When you are ignorant about the world, it becomes a very confusing place. https://x.com/JohnDSailer/status/1907794415436873742?t=Zw9FFVC-NbpuDBmH58BIew&s=19 https://x.com/JohnDSailer/status/1907794415436873742?t=Zw9FF... There are dozens of examples of UCLA violating federal civil rights laws. You just decided to pretend they don't exist.
    - SubiculumCode 1y ago
      That is not relevant to what I am saying at all. I am saying that there is no legal basis for demanding 1 Billion dollars in as that is 1) a made up number from Trump's head, 2) UCLA is innocent until proven guilty, 3) withholding Federal grants duly awarded violates impoundment.
      - polski-g 1y ago
        That's why it's a settlement offer, not a judgement. If they think they're innocent, they can go through discovery and go to trial. But for the same reason Columbia settled: they know they broke the law. They used protected characteristics in hiring decisions.
        SubiculumCode 1y ago
        And the suspension of grants? And is settlement offers even legal in this context?
        polski-g 1y ago
        The suspension of grants is not the DOJ. It is the DOE for violations of Title 9.
        SubiculumCode 1y ago
        Then why is the resumption of those grants tied to it?
        SubiculumCode 1y ago
        How is the suspension of a research grant even related to a violation of title 9? It's bullshit, and everyone knows it, because it is actually extortionistic bullshit.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

SubiculumCode 1y ago

If they decide to settle, even if for a much smaller amount, its a big L for the UC system and the nation. The past Universities were much smaller, but the UC system is a beast. They must fight this or we are really going down the road of a politicized and neutered academia (like in Russia). This along with the recent Executive Order claiming to be able to require a political appointee to approve every research grant, we are going down the wrong road. I am constantly thinking about this modern misunderstanding of what the framers of the Constitution meant by "Executive Power" is simple "to execute the law". "Article II Vests Executive Power, Not the Royal Prerogative" [1][2] is critical and needs to be set front stage. [1] https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2062/ https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2062/ [2]https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-meaning-of-article-ii-and-%27executive-power%27-to-trump https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-meaning-of-article-...

homeonthemtn 1y ago
Blame Congress. There are 3 branches of power meant to keep the others in check. That's not happened in...20, 30 years now?
- jonnycomputer 1y ago
  Why not both?
- SubiculumCode 1y ago
  Yes. But there are systemic reasons that this has become the case. 1. For the house, since 1932 or so, the number of House Representatives has been fixed, meaning what used to be 30-50k citizens per representative, is quickly approaching 1M citizens:1 ratio. Instead of knocking on your neighbor's doors, you need to beg for money to run an expensive campaign. 2. Starting with Radio and TV and into hyperdrive with the internet, national political figures like the President can command a huge amount of political donations to be under their own control. That money can and is used to threaten House Representatives with getting primaried by the President, see 1. above. 3. As the law article I posted in the parent comment above thoroughly and convincingly investigated, the meaning of Executive Powers has changed from "Congress tells me what to do, and I do it" to I am a mini-king. Presidents have been able to push this growth as well, because see 2, then see 1.

dfee 1y ago

Beyond the headline - the context seems to be this: > A draft of a proposed agreement sent to the school Friday and obtained by CNN requires UCLA to pay the federal government $1 billion over multiple installments, along with a $172 million claims fund for people impacted by violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. > The agreement the administration is proposing – which, if agreed to, would mark the biggest settlement it’s received from a higher education institution — requires a resolution monitor to oversee the school, as well as a new senior administrator who will be focused on compliance with anti-discrimination laws. > The proposed agreement prohibits overnight demonstrations and calls on the school to revise its policies and procedures on protests. It also requires UCLA to discontinue race and ethnicity-based scholarships and provide the resolution monitor with admissions data. > The proposal would ensure single-sex housing for women on campus and ensure athletic recognition for female athletes in women’s sports. The UCLA hospital and medical school will also be expected to stop providing gender-affirming care. > In return, UCLA’s funding would be restored and the school would be eligible for future federal grants and contracts.

jonnycomputer 1y ago
And to stop providing gender affirming care.
- SubiculumCode 1y ago
  Not to mention that the lawsuit in question has already been settled [1] https://jewishjournal.com/news/383073/settlement-reached-in-uc-antisemitism-case/ https://jewishjournal.com/news/383073/settlement-reached-in-...

jonnycomputer 1y ago

>The UCLA hospital and medical school will also be expected to stop providing gender-affirming care. What does this have to do with anything that UCLA is accused of? This isn't about discrimination. This is about Trump forcing America's institutions to bend to his will. It's about power, and nothing else.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
spondylosaurus 1y ago
It's "discrimination" when it helps people the admin doesn't like, but it's mandatory to actually discriminate against people the admin doesn't like.
- sundaeofshock 1y ago
  I wish people would stop using the term admin in relationship to Trump. This is the Trump Regime and we should all act accordingly.
  - jonnycomputer 1y ago
    the problem is is that doing so makes you automatically lose credibility with a large part of the public. another problem is that Trump is not (yet) a dictator and we are (still, for now) a Constitutional democracy.
    - jfengel 1y ago
      If you are criticizing Trump, did you have any credibility with that part of the public to begin with? Not saying there aren't reasons to avoid name calling. But I feel like battle lines are fixed by now. I don't feel like "Good point" is a likely reaction to anything said by anyone.
      - jonnycomputer 1y ago

shortrounddev2 1y ago

Any university that settles with that fascist are cowards at best, and committing bribery at worst

mikeyouse 1y ago

I really wish some of the cowards braying about censorship on campus over the past decade would actually stand up against this… the entire right-wing media and legal apparatus (aside from FIRE maybe?) is just standing by or cheering this lawlessness and it’s infuriating.

phonon 1y ago
FIRE has been pretty clear... e.g. https://www.thefire.org/news/inside-trump-administrations-extortion-industrial-complex https://www.thefire.org/news/inside-trump-administrations-ex...
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  FIRE talks out of both sides of their mouth. Yes, they aren't absolute partisans and have been materially opposing part of Trump's fascist regime. But their media arm remains excessively focused on perceived excesses of the left and they've been unable to make a consistent full throated public denouncement of what is happening.
dissent 1y ago
I've never set foot in the USA, but from an outsider looking in, it seems like academic integrity was sidelined by ideology during that period. Once this has been normalised, it's not difficult for a competing ideology to move in. Seems like a real shame, but surely this didn't just happen overnight in 2024.
tastyface 1y ago
Attempting to shame hypocrites is a pointless endeavor. They will only laugh at you while continuing to do what they do. The only reasonable move is to interpret them as damage and route around them.
- mikeyouse 1y ago
  I don’t disagree but as far as I’m aware, they’re necessary for this whole democracy mess to work. The only reason Nixon was forced out of office is because his party finally had enough and couldn’t stand the shame (and certain electoral defeat) had he remained in office, so they loudly abandoned him and indicated they’d vote for his removal from office if they were given the choice.